- This topic has 45 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 22 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I got this email today from someone who can’t speak proper like wot I can (too much verbage/adjectivity… erm).
quote:
Hi—
Normally I don’t really bother writing letters of criticism to people who run websites…but as your site is being promoted as *the* definitive source of information on “Lexx” (on one of the Series 2 DVD releases, no less) I figure this site (and by extension, YOU) are fair game.Specifically, your reviews are shallow and poorly written. Your little parenthetical asides (“huh-huh! I bet Xev is on her period!”) are juvenile, unneccessary, and worst of all: NOT FUNNY. I’ve been visiting your site somewhat frequently to fill in a few of the gaps in my memory of Lexx’s series progression, but wading through pages and pages of badly formatted run-on text without the vaguest sense of subject/verb agreement makes my head hurt. A few tips:
– Please try to remember the order in which important plot events occur, when you’re writing a recap. Write it down while you’re watching the episode, if you need to. VCRs have a pause button for a reason. Also, if you’re going to transcribe a voice-over, please listen carefully to make sure that your transcriptions are accurate and make sense. For instance:
Zev is not “a” B3K, Zev is “of” B3K. Meaning B3K(the planet) is where she(Zev) is from.– Clean up the crappy usage, or take an English composition class. Meaning: please learn the difference between “your” and “you’re”, and “there”, “they’re”, and “their”. Decide BEFORE you write a sentence if it’s in the present, past, or future tense, and once you make your choice STICK WITH IT. You Brits invented the language, for chrissake. Improper word usage and crappy subject/verb agreement just make you sound like a damned moron.
– We can all see that Xenia Seeberg is a purty gal, and you’ve let us all know that you are a heterosexual male many, many times. You’d like to do her, WE GET IT. But your ubiquitous, jokey, parenthetical asides (“What! Xev’s going after Kai AGAIN! But she’s never seen ME!” ad nauseum) are just sad. Trekkie-sad.
It’s obvious you really like the show, and that you’re devoted to providing a huge resource on alternative sci-fi, and that’s great and all. Well done, you. And I have nothing against you, personally. Though I’m positive we wouldn’t agree on best episode particulars and who the better Zev/Xev is, you could be a nice enough bloke, a prince among men and a goddamned rocket scientist to boot. But if you’re really serious about wanting thousands of alternative sci-fi fans to come to you as their definitive resource for all things geekish, then it would be really nice if you’d proofread your content. Snazzy site graphics and customized frame borders will only get you so far.
Not that you give a fiddler’s fart on a pogo stick what a random American geek-chick thinks of your efforts, but when your writing is sloppy, folks like me tend to figure everything else is, too. I’m sure you get tons of site mail that kisses your ass, which I’m sure will cancel all of this out.
Etcetera,
Jen Fridy
Quite accurate observations I thought. Shame she was so acidic.
Perhaps I should have placed this in the Angst forum
What a lovely person, and I was thinking the same thing myself (not really, I’ll just join the queue wanting too kiss your ass!!!)
There’s always gonna be someone out there who thinks they can do better, personally I’d turn around and say ‘I don’t give a rat’s arse what you think, it’s my bleedin site and I’ll write what I want’.
Why doesn’t this person become a member as they must be the epitome of being sad.
I’m not gonna kiss your ass Saddy, but at the end of the day it’s your baby and you can do as you damn well please!!!
I don’t think that is constructive criticism at all, just an attack from an absent minded person (it’s probably Bonnee again!!!) who has nothing better to do with their time…sod em and move on.
Squishy
Maybe if there were more lewd comments about Kai…?
If I were writing the reviews, I would invariably comment about to what degree Xev deserves a spanking. In fact, I think I would have used that as my rating system… on a scale of 1 to 10 Xev spankings.
The point about grammer is valid, I think. But what you think of an episode is your perogative. It’s your website.
To men it sounded like someone needs to get laid =). Why would a chick waste her time telling you all that. I think she likes you.
Bad Press good press, it’s all the same.
[ 14-03-2002: Message edited by: HisDivineShadow ]
Thanks Saddy I needed a good laugh today. As someone who minored in English I think Grammar is overrated. Someone needs to explain to lil Ms. Prissy Pants that spoken and written language are only extentions of thought. The fact that she bothered to write such a long well thought out letter only further proves how well you do what you do Saddy.
Devine/Divine;Anyone ever hear the famous story about the Italian, Polish, and British men who talked about what language God speaks? If so point Jen in that direction.
quote:
Originally posted by LexxLurker:
As someone who minored in English I think Grammar is overrated.
Yep, well I’m not big on grammer either
Which is a shame since my father is an ex-english teacher. He once sent me to a psychiatrist because he thought I was dislexic. I wasn’t…. I’m just lazy I guess. quote:
… spoken and written language are only extentions of thought.
And therein lies the whole point (and my excuse
) to the SG Guide. It is written from the point of view of a sci fi SadGeezer (not an English Expert – or a writer, simply someonme very keen on spouting off about their fave show). This can be irritating for some people with a better command of the English language, I’m not over concerned about the poor grammar. The spelling mistakes are bad, but if the spell checker doesn’t pick them up then they will get left. There is only so much error correction that time will allow.
My critisism of her otherwise accurate email is that she completely missed the point of the site. It’s the SadGeezers Guide! ‘Trekkie Sad’ is an exaggeration sure, but hello! I AM Sad!
– and proud of it!
quote:
Devine/Divine;Anyone ever hear the famous story about the Italian, Polish, and British men who talked about what language God speaks? If so point Jen in that direction.
What story is that?
quote:
Originally posted by Squishy:
Why doesn’t this person become a member as they must be the epitome of being sad.
Hehe, I could do the SadGeezers Guide to English
(NOT! )She would prolly take the test and come out as a Manic Academic English Fanatic
Um, well, if I may leave the ass-kissing to others….?
Grammar and spelling have always been sticking points with me (thanks to a relentless mother), but I don’t correct other people and I don’t obsess about it, because I realize that most people in the world aren’t as anal about it as I (and obviously Jen) are. Besides, as you said, the point of the reviews is to outline the plot and give your opinions of it. I’ve laughed my head off at your comments because they are so… so… Lexxy!
To me, Lexx and Lexxians (which includes sites like this one) have been the source of much needed mirth for the last two years, may we reign supreme forever! Too bad so many people think being serious about it means being “serious” about it.
Also, people who insist they are only being honest with you are also often brutally rude, and Jen proved herself to be no exception. Mom would be appalled at the lack of manners.
[ 14-03-2002: Message edited by: dgrequeen ]
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
Maybe if there were more lewd comments about Kai…?
Hmmm possibly. And yet the majority of visitors to sadgeezer.com are women! So surely that’s not the reason.
At any rate, she should have read the introduction explaining what a SadGeezer is, and in particular:
But please remember…
I am a Cult TV Sci Fi SadGeezer
and this site is probably offensiveYOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
Hmmm. I think I’ve said enough about this person. (I guess I shouldn’t open my emails before going to bed
).Wow, this gal is so anal you could’nt pull a needle out of her butt with a tractor!!!
Jeez, what difference does it make how you say something as long as you get your point across?
I love Sad’s reviews and his side comments are a big part of that…..they are entertaining and make me laugh….
If you watch Lexx you KNOW Zev is Zev OF B3K, I mean nobody ever claimed Sad’s site is the Bible of Lexx or the last word or anything…I suspect this Jen person has another agenda and this is just her way of throwing criticism at a very popular and successful site…Jealousy takes many forms… Oh, yes, “Fiddler’s Fart on a pogo stick”, what a charming command of the english language you have.Lexx is a fun show that everyone should have fun with whether it be writing outrageous and sometimes touching reviews or just making up scenerios and what-ifs…Lets just all climb aboard and enjoy the ride!!
Well, for starters Squishums – its not me. not every person with a concern is the one and same person and/or me. If Sad were to post our most recent email exchange, you’d be ashamed of yourself for continuing to entertain such ‘thoughts’.
I have to confess though, Tony, that despite being a pedant and missing the point of your reviews, this person raises an interesting if belated concern. It should be stressed that you were amongst the first to publicly support (and chastise) the show, and deserve complete credit for your longstanding and hard work. However, as many pointed out to me in another thread, the sex ratio of Lexx fans has become disproprtionally female and/or gay over the years. There is even suggestion within the show of an increasing awareness of this ‘fact’ (assuming its true).
If so, the unabashed hetrosexual element of your reviews may have become increasingly anachronistic, and threatens to alienate newer (as well as older?) Lexx fans. Even more of a concern is the possibiity that sci fi is no longer a male dominated and/or post adolescent province per se, assuming it ever was (which I doubt).
I’m not suggesting you rewrite your old reviews of course – or indeed, change the way you write future reviews. I just wonder, though, if this complaint is symptomatic of something else – namely, a possible disparity between your perceived and actual readers. As someone has indicated to me many times, someone moved to write a letter is often an indication of many other people who might feel similarly, but haven’t bothered to get worked up – and have just gone elsewhere or turned off. So, whilst its probably best not to take her comments personally, I wouldn’t take them in your stride either.
quote:
Originally posted by bonnee:
I have to confess though, Tony, that despite being a pedant and missing the point of your reviews, this person raises an interesting if belated concern. It should be stressed that you were amongst the first to publicly support (and chastise) the show, and deserve complete credit for your longstanding and hard work. However, as many pointed out to me in another thread, the sex ratio of Lexx fans has become disproprtionally female and/or gay over the years. There is even suggestion within the show of an increasing awareness of this ‘fact’ (assuming its true).If so, the unabashed hetrosexual element of your reviews may have become increasingly anachronistic, and threatens to alienate newer (as well as older?) Lexx fans. Even more of a concern is the possibiity that sci fi is no longer a male dominated and/or post adolescent province per se, assuming it ever was (which I doubt).
That is the only reason Sad keeps us around.
While not as estrogen charged as some, I think that Fx, BlackCloud and myself do a pretty good job pointing out the Lexxian things of interest from the female perspective. I love your reviews Saddy, they are one of the reason’s I stayed here. And while I have pointed out the ocassion error, (it was bun head, *not* butt head) I am not god’s gift to proof readers either, so I forgive you your occassional lapse, and love you anyhow.
My god, I constantly find myself censoring my words because someone always gets ticked. Well, PAH, I say. I’m outrageous and so there.
I’m just gonna say what I want to say.I’m a female. I’m a sexually charged estrogene driven big boobed hot blooded sex machine. And I like your reviews, they make me laugh.
Keep ’em the way you want them. That’s the grand power of being master of the site, yes?
I agree with dgrequeen.
I think grammar is important, but it’s not why I came to this site. I came here to learn about Lexx, and to be entertained. This site has accomplished both of those things excellently.
Sad’s reviews were my very first experience with the original movies. They helped take much of the confusion out of Season 2, which Sci-Fi showed before the movies, and out of order.
Might some find the reviews offensive? Maybe. But I can’t imagine they could POSSIBLY find them any more offensive than the series itself!
However, I do have to lodge one complaint about the reviews…
WHERE’S THE REST OF THEM!!!
Come on, Saddy, we’re countin’ on ya buddy! I check the episodes section almost every day, looking for the next installment. It’s tough to put the pathetic Midsummer’s Nightmare behind us, when it keeps staring back from the end of the list!
Must… shift… arse… into gear…
Maybe you aren’t 100% when it comes to grammar, but from one writer to another, I like your style. Give us more!
Thank you for the comments everyone.
I’m afraid I’m like most people in that I’m not as philosophical about criticism as I should be.
Jen’s email was full of holes and lost much of its credibility in the rude manner in which it was written. I found bonnees comments much more constructive.
The way the reviews (including those that get published from others on this site) are written is based solely on the ‘sadgeezer’ premise ie. Chatting up a barmaid/man about LEXX (or B5 or Red Dwarf etc.) and while I should be complementing her on her lovely skin tight sweater, I’m ranting on about Centauri hairstyles etc.
If I can’t turn my attention to the skin tight sweater worn by an ample barmaid then I’m hardly going to be able to concentrate on correct usage of the language, consideration of sexual equality, ageism or racism (though I would be a lot more sensitive to that than anything else (except the Mimbari who are a bunch of in-bred sanctimonious prats with big bones and little willies
)) While writing a review I’m just going to blurt stuff out off the top of my head and usually under the influence of beer. It’s meant for other sadgeezers and lady sadgeezers.
Eventually I’ll probably take steps to see about having all the reviews (also the ones contributed from other reviewers) edited and corrected. But that is such a huge job and there are few people who would want do it.
The SG Guide is now far bigger than most of us realise. There are over 4000 visitors per day (25,000 page hits) and looking at over 2000 web pages. Since the site is managed primarily from a 450Mhz PC in my back bedroom, there is a finite limit to what can be achieved in terms of web-site professionalism. The changes to the site coming over the next few months will help alleviate some of this and allow visitors to contribute more easily and increase power to the administrators and moderators, but for the foreseeable future the SG Guide will remain a fan/hobby site.
One good thing about posting the ‘Jen’ email is that it has helped me glean some useful feedback about the site and that’s always welcome – thanks for your comments and positive words
Did you notice that I spell-checked this post
PS. I received a wonderful present in the post today (THANKS THEFREY!) and the LEXX reviews will be up-to-date within a week
I’d check that spell check, Sad. It’s ‘bonnee’s comments’ and not ‘bonnees comments’
someone is obviously not possessed by the possessive. and thanks for the kind words.
(by the way, I looked up her name on the Net – Jen is a writer (amongst other things), and from the picture I encountered, quite the babe. so if you want to impress a woman worthy of being cast in Lexx, improve your spelling
(by the way, I looked up her name on the Net – Jen is a writer (amongst other things), and from the picture I encountered, quite the babe.
Also quite full of herself, from the tone of her email. Accomplishment and intelligence are no excuse for tactlessness and insensitivity. Frankly, she doesn’t come across as the kind of person I’d care to impress.
What a nasty piece of work that person is…to tell you the truth, I forgot if she was a female or if he was a male. Anywhoo, I don’t care. To add insult to injury (not that she’d ever see this..) I just checked her massage again (a little malapropism) and SHE is a SHE. Why don’t we let her take the hours that Saddy has taken to write up her own reviews? Then we’ll see who’s bad at reviewing. I bet she doesn’t even watch the show hardly. Forgive me and my meanderings and bad spelling and run on’s. Saddy, this site kicks ass! Your reviews are fine! Hope “Dutch Treat” and “The Game” make you happier than previous Lexx.
quote:
Originally posted by the Frey:
That is the only reason Sad keeps us around. While not as estrogen charged as some, I think that Fx, BlackCloud and myself do a pretty good job pointing out the Lexxian things of interest from the female perspective.
On that note, which estrogen-charged female on Sad’s staff is responsible for the notion (implied int he review for Garden) that the watering cans were intended as phallic symbols?
quote:
I love your reviews Saddy, they are one of the reason’s I stayed here. And while I have pointed out the ocassion error, (it was bun head, *not* butt head) I am not god’s gift to proof readers either, so I forgive you your occassional lapse, and love you anyhow.
There are some errors in his reviews. Like in Norb Sad says that we see the carnival in space being disassembled by Mantrid drones, when actually they were disguised as it. Little things like that. The only review that really angered me was White Trash, which for some reason Sad didn’t like, even though it is a pretty good episode and one of Lexx‘s funniest. Plus there are some unnecessary images on some of the episode pages (Super Nova, Gametown, Walpurgis Night, etc.). Besides that the reviews are pretty good.
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
Plus there are some unnecessary images on some of the episode pages (Super Nova, Gametown, Walpurgis Night, etc)
booooooooooobiiiieesss…..
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
On that note, which estrogen-charged female on Sad’s staff is responsible for the notion (implied int he review for Garden) that the watering cans were intended as phallic symbols?
I don’t think that it’s neccessarily a female thing that caused that conclusion to be drawn. I think it’s pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain that they were intended as phallic symbols. It doesn’t take a couple of X chromosomes to pick up on that one.
–Aleck
Well, for starters Squishums – its not me. not every person with a concern is the one and same person and/or me. If Sad were to post our most recent email exchange, you’d be ashamed of yourself for continuing to entertain such ‘thoughts’.
I very much doubt it Bonnee, unless it was an apology for your behaviour in the past. I’m sure you have a nice side to you, yet choose not to employ it here, Jen’s letter would certainly not be out of character had you wrote it.
I’m prepared to let bygones be bygones, but if you choose to resort to the tatics used in your posting demonstrated before, then I will not hesitate in returning to my original opinion of you.
It’s not as if that’s asking much, I know Saddy likes to see criticism here and good healthy debates, but you overstepped the mark too much for my liking.
This board stands out because we prefer to chat and post without trying to rub someone up the wrong way, it’s an unwritten rule I know, but I think many of us would much prefer the board not to degenerate into the flaming and general outright nastiness that is found at Sci-Fi.com.
If you like that sort of thing then by all means go to Sci-Fi, but don’t drag it back here, and that was basically all I was calling on you to do.
SquishyOh, for the love of God! Squishy, just get off it already! You opened the can of worms this time, Bonnee had been behaving ,and you had to go and start the **** hitting the fan again. Can we let this go and move on please? I’m not sure I’m the only one who is sick of this picking between certain members here, (I won’t name any ,but must admit and apologise that I did indulge in one argument with a newbie in the dwarf forum). It’s getting so bad that we can’t have a healthy discussion without someone getting testy. Take a tylenol, smoke a ciggy, have a drink, or whatever else you must do to chill out, but please do it quickly. Discussion is great, arguing and picking fights is juvinile and stupid (unless it’s about this Jen girl ,geeze, what a nutter)
<—- Nirvy getting chilled outIt’s naive to think everyone on the net is well schooled in English grammar and should write everything as formal, prescriptive English. How boring! This person sounds like the same kind who would put you down for having an accent. Keep writing your reviews as you do Sad, because they’re good and they’re a laugh.
quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
I got this email today from someone who can’t speak proper like wot I can (too much verbage/adjectivity… erm).Quite accurate observations I thought. Shame she was so acidic.
Perhaps I should have placed this in the Angst forum
quote:
Originally posted by bonnee:
As someone has indicated to me many times, someone moved to write a letter is often an indication of many other people who might feel similarly, but haven’t bothered to get worked up – and have just gone elsewhere or turned off. So, whilst its probably best not to take her comments personally, I wouldn’t take them in your stride either.
I’ve heard that said too. I’ve always accepted that this site is going to wind up peeps. If anything, I was surprised how little I annoyed people.
No matter what you write, there will always be someone who disagrees with you, with the way you say what you say and possibly even your writing ability. No one is more outspoken on this subject than my father, an ex-English teacher and total perfectionist! he leant me three books on punctuation last year and has even red-penned birthday cards (actually he didn’t, but he’s the sort of bloke who would
)He’s a perfectionist and I’ve never seen him lose a philosophical argument (actually Aleck reminds me of him) – every girl I’ve taken to meet him since I was a teenager has been frightened of him (except Newkate my wife, who thinks he’s a sweetie?!).
What I’m trying to say is, I’m everything he isn’t and yet it was HE who taught me to be proud of that.
If you can get your point across and be understood, natural communicators will appreciate what you are trying to say and not penalise you too heavily. Visitors to this site (by the thousand) may say, “Nice review, shame about the spelling.” The Jen Frith’s of this world have other motives for sending emails like that.
If what you say about the female/gay aspect is true, why are most of the visitors to this site women? Surely I would have recieved some negative comments about this on the board?
Oh yeah, I should mitigate mentioning my father in the above rant. He once wrote a short poem about why people DON’T sweat the small stuff:
MAY I
May I see truth,
And seeing, speak truly.May I do right,
And doing, right myself.May I hurt none,
And hurtless, heal my hurts.May I bring happiness,
And bringing, be happy.If I do not,
I may never.Bernard Fawl
© 1973, 1993 Bernard A.P. Fawl
First published in “Poetry Now North West
1994” anthology.)quote:
Originally posted by bonnee:
I’d check that spell check, Sad. It’s ‘bonnee’s comments’ and not ‘bonnees comments’ someone is obviously not possessed by the possessive.
Naa, I don’t think I should. It wasn’t an orthographical error. Someone should check their instructions on their spell checker.
quote
(by the way, I looked up her name on the Net – Jen is a writer (amongst other things), and from the picture I encountered, quite the babe. so if you want to impress a woman worthy of being cast in Lexx, improve your spelling
You checked her name on the Internet. That’s like saying you know ‘a geezer called Bloggs and he’s so cool coz ‘e makes jeans’. For all you know, Jen Fridy is a 50 year old gay bloke from Basingstoke.
I’m a lucky geezer who recently married the most beautiful woman I’ve ever seen. ‘s’o I really wouldn’t be interested. And why would I want to impress someone so rude? Is that the sort of thing you would do? Would you be overly critical of someone you fancied in the hope of getting their attention …. possibly in the hope of impressing them? Is that what you think Jen did…. do you really think she is that weird?
Ahhh Bonnee, antagonistic as ever
Welcome back.
[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: SadGeezer ]
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
On that note, which estrogen-charged female on Sad’s staff is responsible for the notion (implied in the review for Garden) that the watering cans were intended as phallic symbols?
Erm… That would be me. Or more specifically, my feminine side
{SadGeezer has no staff, just some overworked and “not paid nothin'” moderators}quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
I forgive you your occassional lapse, and love you anyhow.
Thanks dude, that (as with the other comments) means a lot!
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
There are some errors in his reviews. Like in Norb Sad says that we see the carnival in space being disassembled by Mantrid drones, when actually they were disguised as it.
Bollocks dude! No way! Why would the Mandrid drones disguise themselves as a revolving carnival thingy when the only person there was some little scrawny kid in an antique spaceship!? Mandrid drones weren’t in the business of disguise, they were in the business of destruction!
It’s funny though, I’ve had a few emails about that. Erm.. but non about the pictures of some of the ladies in episodes taken from interesting camera angles
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
The only review that really angered me was White Trash, which for some reason Sad didn’t like, even though it is a pretty good episode and one of Lexx’s funniest.
Really!? I’m amazed that you thought it a good episode?! I really really hated it. Perhaps it was just that the humour was a little over the head of this Brit. We aren’t as well up on red-neck jokes as peeps in the US I guess.
[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: SadGeezer ]
quote:
Originally posted by thefrey:
… And while I have pointed out the ocassion error, (it was bun head, *not* butt head)
O oh! Did I correct that? Which episode was it in?
quote
… and love you anyhow.
Aww thanks sweetie
Love you tooI was joking Sad – clearly I’m more adept at getting my point across when I’m not joking. I note it is customary to have a spoiler alert on certain postings to warn people in advance about its content. Perhaps my jokes should begin with the warning Spoil Sport Alert. Either way, I’m sorry for antagonising you. And I’m not back – really. just thought Jen should be defended against the suggestion that she might have been me.
Incidentally, I tend to agree with Lee about Norb. When I watch the (fantastic) opening scene, I’m convinced the ‘playground in space’ theme (park) is intended as a lure and is, in effect, an eloborate disguise. The claim that it is not consistent with the drone’s behaviour doesn’t quite make sense in the Lexx universe: continuity is hardly an issue in Lexx. looks like Donovan just wanted to spend the money obviously allocated to this episode. As for his suggestion that Garden is not rife with sexual imagery and merely a projection of the male libidonal drive – pleaaaseee!! I watched this episode with my girlfriend, her mother and her mother’s mother – and watching them look at each other in continual shock was almost as fun as watching them squirm at Downey’s erection in another episode. The imagery is so overt as to beggar belief.
Spoil Sport Alert 1.
Btw, that IS pretty much how I met my wife.Spoil Sport Alert 2.
I am struck, however, by your suggestion that Jen Fridy could really be Brian Downey.[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
quote:
Originally posted by Nirvanah Rimmer:
Oh, for the love of God! Squishy, just get off it already! You opened the can of worms this time, Bonnee had been behaving ,and you had to go and start the **** hitting the fan again. Can we let this go and move on please? I’m not sure I’m the only one who is sick of this picking between certain members here, (I won’t name any ,but must admit and apologise that I did indulge in one argument with a newbie in the dwarf forum). It’s getting so bad that we can’t have a healthy discussion without someone getting testy. Take a tylenol, smoke a ciggy, have a drink, or whatever else you must do to chill out, but please do it quickly. Discussion is great, arguing and picking fights is juvinile and stupid (unless it’s about this Jen girl ,geeze, what a nutter)
<—- Nirvy getting chilled out
More than happy to Nirvanah, and I agree Bonnee has been behaving, so I’m sorry if you feel I was trying to start something again.
In the time I’ve been here I’ve always tried to avoid getting into scrapes, and still would rather avoid them.
Maybe Bonnee has gone away and given some thought to his previous behaviour here, and it’s nice to see that he can post with the intelligence he demonstrates without all the unecessary nastiness he employed before.
So maybe I’m a little hasty in my opinion of him now, but it did take me (and I imagine a few others) time to calm down, and all I’m trying to get across is that I hope Bonnee will play nice.
It may be selfish of me, but I’ve said it before, I would rather enjoy your’s and the other members company without fear of it turning into a full scale flame war, and feel that Bonnee was beginning to make that situation change.
All I will say is that, so long as Bonnee respects other’s here then I won’t have a problem, and I do apologise if it appeared I was picking up from the last time Bonnee paid us a visit, it certainly was not my intention.
Squishy(NOTE. I amended my original post after bonnee replied to it).
quote:
Originally posted by bonnee:
Spoil Sport Alert 1.
Btw, that IS pretty much how I met my wife.
You know, I believe you! quote:
Spoil Sport Alert 2.
I am struck, however, by your suggestion that Jen Fridy could really be Brian Downey.
Haha. Not a chance Although I do have pictures of him with his arm around Lex Gigeroff. And Lex Gigeroff isn’t shy about kissing male LEXXians!?!
[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: SadGeezer ]
I don’t usually post on the forums, preferring to just read (plus my ancient PC crashes after I hit SEND). But I have to ask: Why did you post a private e-mail to a public bboard, Tony? Better to have just hit “delete.” Or removed the gal’s name from the e-mail before you posted it. Everyone seems to be all worked up about it, and it’s not even their fight.
As for the spelling and grammar – it’s not that bad. (Or should that be “its not that poor”?
Considering all the words you’ve typed on this site, a few typos are no big thing! -MissJean
quote:
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
Bollocks dude! No way! Why would the Mandrid drones disguise themselves as a revolving carnival thingy when the only person there was some little scrawny kid in an antique spaceship!? Mandrid drones weren’t in the business of disguise, they were in the business of destruction!
Yes they are. Later in that apisode they disguise themselves as Norb, and in another episode one takes on 790’s form. It was a trap to get Norb, since Mantrid knew he could use him to get inside the Lexx undetected. It was part of his game. When Mantrid drones eat something, they swoop in and take it apart. At the beginning of Norb the carnival just becomes them all of a sudden, they’re in its shape only different colors. That is a different effect from when they disassemble things in other episodes.
As for the Garden thing, I know we’ve discussed it before and it doesn’t really need to be brought up again. I was just curious. It is theoretically possible that that was the intent, but I find it unlikely. If it were deliberate symbolism it would be more apparent. The possible symbolic significance of the watering cans is just too subtle for the normal viewer to notice.
Spoil Sport Alert
Tony, I’ve read your amendments to my reply, and so would like to amend my own reply by way of reply to your amendment
End Spoil Sport
A lovely poem by your Dad – clearly you’re very proud of him, and the sentiments are quite inspiring.
Consequently,, I want to ask you not to take offense to what I’m about to say. I’m not trying to antagonise you or start a flame war.
I’m a little troubled by the (sudden) desire to impugn Jen’s motives or character. Its almost as if the support has given you the courage to take it more personally than you originally intended. Despite the fact that she was obviously rude, it is also equally apparent that she found your reviews offensive. Although we don’t have to agree with her, we don’t need to agree to recognise the integrity of her concerns. I think thefrey put it best when she said that Jen sounded vexed, and reacted accordingly. The only thing I would disagree with her about here – and by inadvertent extension, agree with you – is the notion that there might be such a thing as uniquely fe/male perspective. A cult sci fi site may be the place to encourage the belief that ‘men are from mars, and women are from venus’, but I think frey would be the first to dispute such nonsense. My experience is that there are as many variations within the sexes as there are between them.
An important point that you might want to consider though – now that women have greater access to educational opportunities, etc, they have statistically revealed themselves to be more intelligent than men (irrespective of the background). If this statistic is replicated in the graviational pull towards sci fi, you might need to be wary of speaking in just the one ‘voice’, and not invariably disallow a woman like Jen her ‘say’, however she says it. Following you’re Dad’s example, I think she deserves the benefit of the doubt – if only because it is us who really benefits from such doubts.
The second – and more personal point – is you’re remark concerning winning philosophical arguments. Speaking as a philosopher, we don’t win or lose arguments. We try and preserve the integrity of the problem/s that give rise to them. More often than not, we invariably fail and so find ourselves arguing with each other. Some people decide to fight on, others realise that trying to win is part of the original problem. There is a famous dispute within philosophy concerning its status as a disipline involving Wittgentein and Popper. Wittgenstein – the allegedly open minded one – resorted to threatening Popper with a red hot poker because Popper wanted to keep the question/s open. Bertrand Russel is notorious for screaming ‘put down that poker!’ Most importantly, there is a debate about what ‘really’ happened that night, and no one can get the ‘facts’ right. What is clear, though, is that the dispute is divided along partisan lines, indicating that people only believe what they want to, and argue according to personal need. There is a point to this – namely, in philosophy(as in anything else), life is like a game of poker, and we can only play with the cards we’re dealt. Jen played her card, we’ve played ours – no point in believing that she isn’t playing fair, cause she is convinced that she has – and who are we to begrudge her conviction?
Finally, if philosophy were able to settle its disputes or answer its own questions, it would have stopped playing the game the day of its own inception. The history of philosopy is (and will remain) old whines in new bottles. Arguments are never lost or won – old solutions appear as new problems, and these new problems go on to reappear as variants of the very questions that vexed everyone in the first place.
[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
As for the Garden thing, I know we’ve discussed it before and it doesn’t really need to be brought up again. I was just curious. It is theoretically possible that that was the intent, but I find it unlikely. If it were deliberate symbolism it would be more apparent. The possible symbolic significance of the watering cans is just too subtle for the normal viewer to notice.
By what grounds are you categorizing “normal”? Because, as has been pointed out several times by several people, in showing this episode to objective parties, practically *every one* of those parties immediately picked up on the sexual symbolism of this episode. People around the office here, who aren’t fans of LEXX, aren’t clued in to the wide array of sexual symbolism used on the show, and aren’t familiar with the sexual humor inherent in the show, when seeing the watering cans and labial designs of the flowers, were pretty quick to realize what they were intended to represent. And these are people from a wide array of backgrounds, not a homogenous group of people that would tend to tilt the scales. My family members, upon seeing this, came to the same conclusion. Friends of mine, ditto. Reviews I’ve read, ditto. A broad spectrum of people have seen, recognized, and acknowledged the sexual symbolism of these bits of set and prop design.
If, by “normal”, you’re referring to yourself, you have to take into account that you have (publically, on this board) claimed that you have no sexual urges or instinct, and that you find the expression of same offensive to the point of physical revulsion: this would make you quite probably less able to spot sexual symbolism when it’s overt, or either conciously or unconciously refuse to acknowledge the presence of such symbolism when possible. At any rate, the fact that you either do not have, or believe that you do not have, a sex drive, sexual urges, the inborn drive to procreate, in and of itself excludes you from what would be considered “the normal viewer.” So if that’s your basis (or, as with other points where you’ve made broad generalizations regarding the generally accepted quality and/or popularity of certain works, you are extrapolating the view/opinion of 2 or 3 not-randomly-selected people to represent the view/opinion of a vast number of people) for your stance, you are probably quite off the mark.
–Aleck
Nice points, bonnee, and forgive me for butting in, but I don’t think it was Jen’s opinion so much that got people going as it was her tone. Certainly she has a right to her own opinions, and I don’t think anybody here would dispute that. It’s a free board, so we can have all the opinions we want, and spout them ad infinitum if it makes us happy, but there simply is no excuse for bad manners while doing it.
quote:
Originally posted by :
I don’t usually post on the forums, preferring to just read (plus my ancient PC crashes after I hit SEND). But I have to ask: Why did you post a private e-mail to a public bboard, Tony? Better to have just hit “delete.” Or removed the gal’s name from the e-mail before you posted it.-MissJean
It’s a good point. I wanted to see what others thought of the poor spelling and grammar on the site and although the emial in question was a little acidic, it was quite succinct.
I wouldn’t want to publish parts of it in case I was accused of taking out the bad bits
and there is a policy at http://www.sadgeezer.com of crediting all submissions used on the site.The decision was to post parts or all of the email. In such circumstances, I’d usually go for all of it (‘warts an’ all’).
There is also the possibility that the emailer would want to contribute to the discussion.
I purposely didn’t include the email address
quote:
Originally posted by bonnee:
Spoil Sport Alert…..
Actually, I can’t take offence or exception with anything you said! – It was a bloody good read actually!
Cheers!
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
Yes they are. Later in that apisode they disguise themselves as Norb, and in another episode one takes on 790’s form. It was a trap to get Norb, since Mantrid knew he could use him to get inside the Lexx undetected. It was part of his game. When Mantrid drones eat something, they swoop in and take it apart. At the beginning of Norb the carnival just becomes them all of a sudden, they’re in its shape only different colors. That is a different effect from when they disassemble things in other episodes.
Yes, that’s quite true! I stand corrected. I’ll make an addition to the review this evening.
Thanks dude!
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
If, by “normal”, you’re referring to yourself, you have to take into account that you have (publically, on this board) claimed that you have no sexual urges or instinct, and that you find the expression of same offensive to the point of physical revulsion: this would make you quite probably less able to spot sexual symbolism when it’s overt, or either conciously or unconciously refuse to acknowledge the presence of such symbolism when possible.
There you go again, trying to chip away at my credibility by saying I’m somehow not normal (by the way, I got an e-mail message from Mandara K. a few days ago. It seems you were able to manipulate her into believing I’m paranoid). I am perfectly ordinary. I have normal thoughts, normal beliefs, normal attitudes, come from a normal family, and have had a normal life. All in all I am 98% typical in mentality. Just your average guy. Now cut it out.
quote:
People around the office here, who aren’t fans of LEXX, aren’t clued in to the wide array of sexual symbolism used on the show, and aren’t familiar with the sexual humor inherent in the show, when seeing the watering cans and labial designs of the flowers, were pretty quick to realize what they were intended to represent.
Like I said, it’s possible the imagery in Garden is as you say, but I find it unlikely. I am generally quite good at spotting the subtleties of Lexx (or any of the other shows I watch diligently), and I didn’t notice anything like that in Garden until a female board member posted that there were “pallic and labial symbols” in the episode. Plus, after I read such allegations I showed the still that’s on Sad’s review to my roommate to see what he thought, and he didn’t see anything suggestive in it. I suspect your presenting of the image to others was set up by you (consciously or subconsciously) in a manner that would maximize the subject’s potential to agree with your view. No more needs to be said on this.
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
Like I said, it’s possible the imagery in Garden is as you say, but I find it unlikely. I am generally quite good at spotting the subtleties of Lexx (or any of the other shows I watch diligently), and I didn’t notice anything like that in Garden until a female board member posted that there were “pallic and labial symbols” in the episode.
Oh DT, how on earth could you miss them. My brother and I were going through the Lexx tapes I has ‘aquired’ together, and I thought he was going to bust a gut when the watering cans showed up, he wondered aloud it they p*ssed or spit, gross humour to be sure, but no one had to hit him over the head with anything to pick up on the images. He watches Lexx occassionally, and checks out my web page all the time, and has several times *snerked* at various penis shaped things, including most recently the flashlight and Octrina in Walpurgis Night.
And we musn’t forget that the Lexx is also a flying penis, where its many ejaculations are obviously the displacement/compensation for Stan’s impotence. If that hasn’t been argued here, it certainly invites the kind of scrutiny that cultural theorists certainly enjoy when discussing the question of ‘sexual identity’. Given Stan’s poor experience with wo/men, its a plausible line of enquiry. No disrespect intended Lee
quote:
Originally posted by bonnee:
And we musn’t forget that the Lexx is also a flying penis, where its many ejaculations are obviously the displacement/compensation for Stan’s impotence. If that hasn’t been argued here, it certainly invites the kind of scrutiny that cultural theorists certainly enjoy when discussing the question of ‘sexual identity’. Given Stan’s poor experience with wo/men, its a plausible line of enquiry. No disrespect intended Lee
You are correct, sir!
Do you have any pictures of Stan’s ‘penis’ that you could upload Flame? Preferably one where Stan is limp (read – when the Lexx is hungry) and another where Lexx is ejaculating Stan’s entire ‘load’ of grievances upon an unsuspecting planet. You would be a scholar and a gentlewo/man if you could manage it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.